2015 (9) TMI 304 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Detention of goods for carrying incorrect documents One time payment for release of goods Petitioners goods were intercepted in transit and on verification of goods and records, even though goods were accompanied with required documents, respondent detained goods and vehicle Respondent thereafter issued impugned Goods Detention Notice for reason that in Gujarat Transit Pass, Consignor Name / Consignee Name and name mentioned in invoice were different Held that - Admittedly main issue was related to not mentioning correct name of consignee Petitioner agreed to pay one time disputed tax and on such payment, goods may be directed to be released Payment of one time tax immediately for release of goods was acceptable to respondent Thus, respondent to quantify one-time tax payable On receipt of proof of such payment being made by petitioner, 1st respondent directed to release goods forthwith Petition disposed of Decided in favour of Assesse.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to goods detention notice based on discrepancies in documents and transit pass, release of detained goods without conditions, payment of disputed tax for release of goods.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a registered dealer in stainless steel articles, challenged a goods detention notice issued by the Commercial Tax Officer based on discrepancies in documents and transit pass. The petitioner had requested its supplier to supply S.S. Circles and S.S. Utencils, and when the goods were dispatched, they were detained by the tax officer despite being accompanied by required documents such as tax invoices and lorry receipts. The main contention was that the invoice correctly mentioned the petitioner's name, but the Gujarat Transport Pass did not correctly mention the consignee's name. The petitioner expressed willingness to pay the disputed tax for the release of goods.

The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the detention of goods was unjustified as the necessary documents were provided as per the TNVAT Act. The petitioner offered to pay the disputed tax amount to secure the release of the goods. The Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) agreed with the proposal and confirmed that upon payment of the disputed tax, the goods would be released by the tax authorities.

In light of the submissions made by both parties, the Court directed the tax authorities to quantify the one-time tax payable by the petitioner immediately. Once the petitioner paid the disputed tax and provided proof of payment, the tax authorities were instructed to release the goods without any further conditions. The Court clarified that the petitioner could challenge the tax authorities' actions through appropriate legal proceedings if necessary. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.